Actually, no I don't quite agree. While I agree that the license helps to establish the person as an expert, in court the entire background of the person is needed to prove him/her an expert. The license alone isn't going to do it. The court wants to know what knowledge and expertise the witness has in the area. And if the person has the knowledge and experience to be an expert his or her testimony is admissible and it is up to the trier of fact to decide what weight to give it. There is nothing in the rules of evidence that says an appraisal from a licensed appraiser is automatically superior to a valuation done by someone else or, to use your phrase, that the appraiser's value is "deemed legally reliable while the valuation of a real estate agent isnít." If you think there is something in the federal rules of evidence (which would apply to a federal tax case concerning the gain on the OP's real estate) that supports your statement please cite the rule that says so. I've litigated cases in federal court and dealt with experts. I've not seen any such rule.
I'm not saying the license is not significant or helpful. Clearly it is. But I am saying that nothing in the law says that the licensed appraiser's valuation is automatically better than any other.
Dear Taxing Matters,
I have answered to all your questions. Would you, please, help me to summarize the responses? It is quite difficult for me to comprehend.
I would highly appreciate if you could present a simple (very approximate-OK) equasion onto how the taxes would be looking like if the house is sold.